Talk:Virtual function

Untitled

I think this article needs a section on Default Virtual Methods.

This would qualify the fact that the child has a option of -

[1] Override with its own virtual method (polymorph) [2] use Default Virtual Method (in the parent) [3] Override and also use the parents default method

This section should also state one or two languages that support this.

Shawnk Fri 06/23/2006

This article has a very poor definition of virtual function, and a completely incorrect one of pure virtual function. You'd fail my interview!

C++/Java Only

This article indicates that these ideas are generally part of Object Oriented Programming, but they're not. There are plenty of Object Oriented Programming languages where the semantics of "virtual" or "pure virtual" methods are arrived at by very different means. Jfm3 (talk) 06:12, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Anybody like to do the C# version of the examples? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.18.197.179 (talk) 10:29, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

there should be mention that in Java all methods are virtual by default - dddd (talk) 18:50, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Bad definition

I do not belive that this is the correct defenition and in any case, the example is that of polymorphism and does nothing in the way of explaining what does the use of the keyword virtual help.

Not ease of understanding Shourya soniDGG (talk) 06:06, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Definition Fix

I made an attempt at correcting the definition. I believe that it is now correct (if not complete).

Andy 16:10, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Example Fix

Even though it's not relevant to the topic discussed I think Wikipedia examples should not include code with such obvious memory leaks (four instances of Animal are allocated but never released). I'll fix this. --Liss 16:29, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Error: C++/pure virtual functions

In c++, pure virtual functions may have definitions. So I think this article is wrong there. (e.g. "http://www.gotw.ca/gotw/031.htm")

Why virtual

Why is this concept called virtual? --Abdull 14:09, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Output for undefined

If the behavior of an action is undefined, it simply does not make any sense to present Output here.

What that output represent is how some implementation of a c++ compiler handles the situation.

By not even mentioning what compiler was used, showing the output becomes both pointless but also dangerous (it is *not* safe to assume that the output is what one's going to see everytime everwhere).

84.191.199.138 (talk) 15:34, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

C# abstract methods

This article needs some mention of the (bizarre in my view) requirement for implementations of abstract methods in derived classes to specify the override keyword. Needs somebody who knows C# inside out and I don't qualify!

Yaqoobj (talk) 10:58, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

C++ example

I wouldn't declare the destructors as virtual in the C++ example. It's just confusing.

212.126.224.100 (talk) 14:07, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

OK, I see that it is recommended to declare destructors as virtual in general. But I still think it may be more appropriate to leave the virtual out in the first example.

212.126.224.100 (talk) 14:17, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Please simplify

The sentence: "In the example below having no virtual destructor, while deleting an instance of class B will correctly call destructors for both B and A if the object is deleted as an instance of B, an instance of B deleted via a pointer to its base class A will produce undefined behaviour." is a bit long and at least for me (not a native english speaker) the meaning of this sentence is left unclear. Please someone consider reading it and making it clearer. Thank you. 188.238.11.76 (talk) 17:10, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Code samples

There's an absurd amount of code in this article, maybe the examples should be cut down to one or two languages? – Acdx (talk) 13:04, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Why such a complex example to illustrate the wrong usage of virtual method ?

In one of the example programs, a static nested class has been used to illustrate the wrong usage of virtual functions in the constructor. A simpler example would have done. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arpit.gupta85 (talk • contribs) 07:39, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Override and final explicit keywords

Override and final keywords added in C++11 standard. Explicit overrides and final . It is an explicit keywords indicating overriding of virtual functions in compilation time. RippleSax (talk) 09:12, 24 November 2015 (UTC)